According to Telegraph UK law allows in some cases for "non-crimes" to appear on one's criminal records:
Incidents must be logged by police and can show up on a DBS check even if officers accept there was no crime
Police have recorded nearly 120,000 “non-crime” hate incidents and may have stopped those accused from getting jobs
An alternative source for the same information is this one.
It has been revealed that 34 police forces in England and Wales recorded almost 120,000 ‘non-crime’ hate incidents between 2014-2019.
So called ‘hate incidents’ must be recorded “irrespective of whether there is any evidence to identify the hate element”, according to the College of Policing (CoP) guidelines.
Although such cases are not crimes, they can appear during criminal record checks.
I find strange that these incidents might appear on criminal record:
- the "non-crime" suggests being minor
- they seem to be very subjective as they are based on someone's perception of how another person is acting
There seems to be a lack of proportionality between the act and the effect (having a criminal record clearly affects employment).
What are the political arguments that were used to support this law?
Note: according to West Yorkshire Police a non-crime appears in the context of hate crimes (not a clear definition, but at least the expression is clearly used with examples):
A hate incident is any non-crime incident which is perceived by the victim or any other person to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person's disability, race, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity or perceived disability, race, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity.
Verbal or online abuse, insults or harassment, such as taunting, offensive leaflets and posters, abusive gestures, dumping of rubbish outside homes or through letterboxes, and bullying at school or in the workplace. A hate incident doesn't mean that we won't take it seriously if someone reports it.